The hardcore dharma movement places too much value on bizarre meditative experiences, the implicit assumption in all hardcore dharma diagonistics in that all experiences inherently "mean" something, and that most experiences imply some sort of "attainment". For example, if someone were to post:

"Hey I just saw a bright light during meditation, what does it mean?"

The classical hardcore dharma response would be: it means you've crossed the A&P (a term referring to partial enlightenment in the movement). Furthermore the movement gives too much credence to weird experiences which simply have no place in this dhamma-vinaya, e.g:

The hardcore dharma movement believes the path does not truly eliminate suffering at it's classic "final" attainment, AKA MCTB Fourth Path. This was originally considered to be the equivalent of the Buddha's Arahatship, though they later abandoned this belief. Nevertheless, for the adherents that believe that the path does not truly eliminate all suffering, then it would be proper to point out that their endeavors have no goal or purpose.

This is simply because the Buddha's entire purpose of his teaching was to eliminate suffering. Whereas they claim that "enlightenment" does no such thing.

Hence two disparate situations.

Point No. 3)

The hardcore dharma movement place too much value on the Commentaries and the Visuddhimagga. They have created and synthesized a brand new teaching of nanas and jhanas, that actually is found nowhere in the Canon and ACTUALLY nowhere found in the Commentaries or Visuddhimagga either.

The primary function of the nanas of the Comy and the Visuddhimagga were attainments of SPIRITUAL INSIGHT, not attainments of BIZARRE EXPERIENCE.

But they fail to realize this because they have not studied the source material of this doctrine.

Point No. 4)

The hardcore dharma movement eliminates the moral component of the path and favors discursive thought and labeling. This entirely eliminates the need to eliminate greed, hatred and delusion as well as unskillful actions.

This renders the path easier, and more interesting for people who do not wish to improve as individuals.

Point No. 5)

The hardcore dharma movement is method obsessed. They are obsessed with technique and prefer technique and practice over all sensible evaluation. Their primary obsession is the noting technique of U Narada.

The Buddha however, never gave step by step instructions for anything, because it was supposed to be our common sense and conscience that guided us to practice in this path. However it is ironic that instead of evaluating themselves inwardly, on where they would need to change, they instead decided to turn to techniques.

---

Note:

I do NOT condemn, or wish to separate "more dhamma oriented" Buddhists from "hardcore" Buddhists. As far as I'm concerned this would be incredibly unskillful, and the fact of the matter is, is that we're all adherents of this teaching and all human beings.

Furthermore I actually have tremendous respect for "hardcore" Buddhists and actually do believe them to be attaining the fruits of the teaching.

taintless wrote:The hardcore dharma movement believes the path does not truly eliminate suffering at it's classic "final" attainment, AKA MCTB Fourth Path. This was originally considered to be the equivalent of the Buddha's Arahatship, though they later abandoned this belief...This is simply because the Buddha's entire purpose of his teaching was to eliminate suffering. Whereas they claim that "enlightenment" does no such thing.

There is POV that Buddha taught to stop potentially limitless amount of future rebirths so that without birth there would not be future aging, illness, pain and more death. So 99.9999% of potential or actual Dukkha would cease in that way.

We cannot experience even 1% of dukkha in one life compared with trillions of life.

"Life is a struggle. Life will throw curveballs at you, it will humble you, it will attempt to break you down. And just when you think things are starting to look up, life will smack you back down with ruthless indifference..."

If their path renders no visible, beneficial results or fruits that are IMMEDIATELY visible. Then there really is no point to practicing their path. If their path merely eliminates the POSSIBILITY of "future births" but does nothing to eliminate suffering in the HERE, AND, NOW. Then their path is useless.

When it talks about Arhants:"And how is a monk an arahant? His evil, unskillful qualities that are defiled, that lead to further becoming, create trouble, ripen in stress, and lead to future birth, aging, & death have gone far away.[14] This is how a monk is an arahant." MN39

It sounds like the trouble and dukkha that it talks about relates to dukkha of future lives which Arahants do not have.

There are hints that even Buddha has some uncomfortable mental states:

example: Buddha didn't want to teach the Dhamma because:

"And if I were to teach the Dhamma and others would not understand me, that would be tiresome for me, troublesome for me.'" - MN26

Then, while the Lord was in solitude and seclusion, this thought arose in his mind: "Formerly I was living hemmed in by bhikkhus and bhikkhunis... and I was living in discomfort and not at ease. But now I live not hemmed in by bhikkhus and bhikkhunis... in comfort and at ease."Ud4.5

So apparently even the Buddha could experience discomfort and unease.

Also,

Sometime later, Devadatta went to the Buddha and suggested that the leadership of the Order should be handed over to him in view of the Buddha's approaching old age. The Buddha scorned the suggestion, saying, "Not even to Sāriputta or Moggallāna would I hand over the Order, and would I then to thee, vile one, to be vomited like spittle?" (Vin.ii.188. This incident is referred to in the Abhayarājakumāra Sutta, M.i.393). http://www.palikanon.com/english/pali_n ... adatta.htm

It does sounds like Buddha was angry at Devadatta.

"Life is a struggle. Life will throw curveballs at you, it will humble you, it will attempt to break you down. And just when you think things are starting to look up, life will smack you back down with ruthless indifference..."

taintless wrote:Right, but right now we're not speculating about the mental well-being of Arahats or the Buddha.

How exactly does this relate to the discussion?

It relates to point #2. Maybe we, or I, have unrealistic expectation of what it means to be Awakened and how much dukkha immediately ceases.

"Life is a struggle. Life will throw curveballs at you, it will humble you, it will attempt to break you down. And just when you think things are starting to look up, life will smack you back down with ruthless indifference..."

3. ßSitting on a side the wandering ascetic Jambukhàdana said to venerable Sàriputta: ßFriend Sàriputta, it is said `extinction', what is extinction?û

ßFriend, the destruction of greed, hate and delusion is extinction.û

4. ßFriend, is there a path and method for the realization of extinction?û

ßFriend, there is a path and method to realize extinction.û

5. ßFriend, what is the path and method to realize extinction?û

ßFriend, it is this same Noble Eightfold Path, for the realization of extinction, such as right view, right thoughts, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right establishment of mindfulness and concentration.û

6. ßFriend, the path and method is excellent for the realization of extinction. It is suitable that I should be diligent.û

3. ßSitting on a side the wandering ascetic Jambukhàdana said to venerable Sàriputta: ßFriend Sàriputta, it is said `perfection', what is perfection?û

ßFriend, the destruction of greed, hate and delusion is perfectionû

4. ßFriend, is there a path and method to realize perfection?û

ßFriend, there is a path and method to realize perfectionû

5. ßFriend, what is the path and method for the realization of perfection?û

ßFriend, it is this same Noble Eightfold Path, for the realization of perfection, such as right view, right thoughts, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right establishment of mindfulness and right concentration.û

6. ßFriend, the path and method is excellent for the realization of extinction. It is suitable that I should be diligent.û

Alex123 wrote:So apparently even the Buddha could experience discomfort and unease.

And yet some suttas talk about the "here and now" cessation of suffering - so how does one reconcile this apparent contradiction? Is it about being "disjoined" from these feelings?

Pretty much, yes - it's the ol' simile of two darts, the physical affliction and the mental affliction. The latter can be trained away, which removes the teeth of the former.

Unpleasant feeling due to contact either causes dukkha due to avijja (confusion and bewilderment about what's what), or does not cause dukkha due to yathabutananadassana (knowing and seeing what's what). It's unpleasant, sure, but it's as problematic as something being green instead of blue.

"And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

"And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]

taintless wrote:Arahatship is defined as the destruction of greed, hatred and delusion.

Arahants still experience pleasure and pain, but they have stopped the clinging to pleasure and aversion for pain that trigger greed, hate, and delusion. If the Hardcore Dhamma Movement is simply making that point, you may have to reconsider Point #2. However, if they are saying that there will always be some clinging/aversion leading to greed, hate, delusion, and the resultant dukkha, then your Point #2 may still be valid.

What is this Hardcore Dhamma Movement? Do they have a website or a central spokesperson?

I just saw Tilt's post. I will have to read that thread for more info.

EDIT: Interesting how before meditating, I felt like expressing a view on this topic, but after meditating, I feel like a better option is not to say anything about it at all. So I've taken down that previous post I wrote.

In peace.

Last edited by manas on Wed Apr 03, 2013 9:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Alex123 wrote:So apparently even the Buddha could experience discomfort and unease.

And yet some suttas talk about the "here and now" cessation of suffering - so how does one reconcile this apparent contradiction? Is it about being "disjoined" from these feelings?

First of all, not all dukkha ceases. Even the Buddha felt "severe illness, and sharp and deadly pains." DN16. Dukkha of aging, illness, death, change - still remains.

As for being dis-joined from feeling. What does it mean? That feelings do not affect one at all? Then why would arahant prefer one feeling or another?

daverupa wrote:Unpleasant feeling due to contact either causes dukkha due to avijja (confusion and bewilderment about what's what), or does not cause dukkha due to yathabutananadassana (knowing and seeing what's what). It's unpleasant, sure, but it's as problematic as something being green instead of blue.

As I've written above the Buddha appeared to still experience some sort of connection to pleasant and unpleasant mental states. But the Buddha didn't have avijja.

"Life is a struggle. Life will throw curveballs at you, it will humble you, it will attempt to break you down. And just when you think things are starting to look up, life will smack you back down with ruthless indifference..."

"And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

"And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]

The hardcore dharma movement places too much value on bizarre meditative experiences, the implicit assumption in all hardcore dharma diagonistics in that all experiences inherently "mean" something, and that most experiences imply some sort of "attainment". For example, if someone were to post:

"Hey I just saw a bright light during meditation, what does it mean?"

The classical hardcore dharma response would be: it means you've crossed the A&P (a term referring to partial enlightenment in the movement). Furthermore the movement gives too much credence to weird experiences which simply have no place in this dhamma-vinaya, e.g:

The hardcore dharma movement believes the path does not truly eliminate suffering at it's classic "final" attainment, AKA MCTB Fourth Path. This was originally considered to be the equivalent of the Buddha's Arahatship, though they later abandoned this belief. Nevertheless, for the adherents that believe that the path does not truly eliminate all suffering, then it would be proper to point out that their endeavors have no goal or purpose.

This is simply because the Buddha's entire purpose of his teaching was to eliminate suffering. Whereas they claim that "enlightenment" does no such thing.

Hence two disparate situations.

Point No. 3)

The hardcore dharma movement place too much value on the Commentaries and the Visuddhimagga. They have created and synthesized a brand new teaching of nanas and jhanas, that actually is found nowhere in the Canon and ACTUALLY nowhere found in the Commentaries or Visuddhimagga either.

The primary function of the nanas of the Comy and the Visuddhimagga were attainments of SPIRITUAL INSIGHT, not attainments of BIZARRE EXPERIENCE.

But they fail to realize this because they have not studied the source material of this doctrine.

Point No. 4)

The hardcore dharma movement eliminates the moral component of the path and favors discursive thought and labeling. This entirely eliminates the need to eliminate greed, hatred and delusion as well as unskillful actions.

This renders the path easier, and more interesting for people who do not wish to improve as individuals.

Point No. 5)

The hardcore dharma movement is method obsessed. They are obsessed with technique and prefer technique and practice over all sensible evaluation. Their primary obsession is the noting technique of U Narada.

The Buddha however, never gave step by step instructions for anything, because it was supposed to be our common sense and conscience that guided us to practice in this path. However it is ironic that instead of evaluating themselves inwardly, on where they would need to change, they instead decided to turn to techniques.

---

Note:

I do NOT condemn, or wish to separate "more dhamma oriented" Buddhists from "hardcore" Buddhists. As far as I'm concerned this would be incredibly unskillful, and the fact of the matter is, is that we're all adherents of this teaching and all human beings.

Furthermore I actually have tremendous respect for "hardcore" Buddhists and actually do believe them to be attaining the fruits of the teaching.

This is just me venting.

Go figure.

1 is not a bad thing.

2 and 3 might be based on an incorrect understandind of the arahat's mind, as the current direction of the discussion is ilustrating.

4 I don't have an opinion based on the dharma overground community.

5 Almost everybody is technique obsessed.

He turns his mind away from those phenomena, and having done so, inclines his mind to the property of deathlessness: 'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.' (Jhana Sutta - Thanissaro Bhikkhu translation)

Well this is really interesting, as far as I see there are two issues:

1) The possibility that we and/or I have misunderstood what the state of an Arahat is.

AND

2) Whether or not these criticisms can really be levied against the Hardcore Dharma movement adherents.

Number 2 is possible for me because I spent a large amount of time following the community at the Dharma Overground, and I noticed that kind of behavior that I mention. Number 1 however means something different, if it is truly the case that we and/or I are misinterpreting what it means to be an Arahat, then the rest of the criticisms may be pointless. Not invalid but pointless, merely because they really are making progress along the path.

The hardcore dharma movement eliminates the moral component of the path and favors discursive thought and labeling. This entirely eliminates the need to eliminate greed, hatred and delusion as well as unskillful actions.

This renders the path easier, and more interesting for people who do not wish to improve as individuals.

While I agree with you on this point, don't you think that this the case with most of Western Secular Buddhism? There is often little to no discussion of following sila in relation to ending suffering; meditation is touted as the only path for this. It seems that adjustment of one's moral behavior is rarely mentioned for fear of offending people.